Democratic Presidential Primaries 2008

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Also, the United States spent $1.3 trillion on healthcare in 2000? Sorry, but that sounds like the biggest load of BS. Considering military expenditures are the largest line item in the US budget, and the US spends less than half a trillion on arms, I think the number is just a little inflated.

Sorry....it was actually 2 trillion.

Expenditures in the United States on health care surpassed $2 trillion in 2006

Now...tell me that can't be fixed.

Plus, you're looking at more than 20% of the GDP being spent on health care by 2020.

But hey....keep passing the budget. And you can keep making excuses of how everything is fine and good when it really isn't.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Azure

Sorry....it was actually 2 trillion.

Now...tell me that can't be fixed.

Plus, you're looking at more than 20% of the GDP being spent on health care by 2020.

But hey....keep passing the budget. And you can keep making excuses of how everything is fine and good when it really isn't.

I'd be surprised if that's government spending. I think the $2 trillion figure is government subsidized plus privately covered payouts. So saying the the US Government is spending that much on healthcare isn't disclosing the facts.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

I'd be surprised if that's government spending. I think the $2 trillion figure is government subsidized plus privately covered payouts. So saying the the US Government is spending that much on healthcare isn't disclosing the facts.

Where did I say the US government spends that much on health care? I believe it was 500 billion, or 16% of their GDP last time I checked.

Which is way too much, considering that a lot of people aren't even covered.

This site has a pretty detailed look at how the 2 trillion is spent.

http://www.kaiseredu.org/topics_im.a...ntID=61&id=358

I must say.....its strange that excuses are being made for budget deficits when pretty comprehensive plans have been draw up to actually reform the inept social programs that are helping drive the US under.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Meanwhile, John McCain's "spiritual advisor" Rod Parsley blathers on about a religious war with Islam and the coming apocalypse.


Just the kind of guy the world needs the President listening and pandering too.

This idiot is looking forward to the end of the world. He thinks it's going to happen soon.

Parsley isn't calling Christians to a holy war. He sees the Jihad that is going on as a fullfillment of prophesy and a sign of things to come. If you believe these young men and women who are blowing themselves up in Iraq and elseware this is a holy war. Parsley believes them. So do I.
I think Parsley would make a far better advisor to a potentual President then some leftwing liberal who thinks that it's all America's fault people want to kill Americans and if they just put down their weapons the world will magically become a peaceful place.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

And I don't see you criticizing McCain for cuddling up with the lunatics.

But yeah, I guess you could say the same thing about Obama. We don't need him listening to that guy.

Frankly, I think we'd all be better off if these guys didn't have any "spiritual advisors" and didn't have to endlessly yak about their faith and how pious they all are. It's sickening.

How and from whom the candidates take their weekly dose of Jesus should be pretty low on the list of priorities but here it is again, right at the top.

Of course if one Jesus sect or the other does have the ear of the President, maybe we should know what they believe in. If they are pining for the end of the world, that is kind of important.

I do love the irony of the United States complaining about Iraq, and the split that the different sects of Islam have on the country (wrong, but that's another post all together) yet America continually divides itself based on what church you belong to, and judges you accordingly. The dissonance in this position always makes me shake my head.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Parsley isn't calling Christians to a holy war. He sees the Jihad that is going on as a fullfillment of prophesy and a sign of things to come. If you believe these young men and women who are blowing themselves up in Iraq and elseware this is a holy war. Parsley believes them. So do I.
I think Parsley would make a far better advisor to a potentual President then some leftwing liberal who thinks that it's all America's fault people want to kill Americans and if they just put down their weapons the world will magically become a peaceful place.

That's nice for him and all, but most of us know that "prophesy" business is, well, not true.

Someone with such radical beliefs shouldn't have any influence on the President.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Where did I say the US government spends that much on health care? I believe it was 500 billion, or 16% of their GDP last time I checked.

Seems I wasn't the only one who thought you were suggesting that the US government spent that much money on healthcare. As a whole country, that is believeable. As the government, completely overblown by a factor of 10.

Which is way too much, considering that a lot of people aren't even covered.

And that's kind of the point. People are not getting the coverage they deserve for the money they are spending. Reforms are required, and those reforms start at the givernmental level through implementation of new programs and policies.

This site has a pretty detailed look at how the 2 trillion is spent.

http://www.kaiseredu.org/topics_im.a...ntID=61&id=358

I must say.....its strange that excuses are being made for budget deficits when pretty comprehensive plans have been draw up to actually reform the inept social programs that are helping drive the US under.

Those numbers you quote have ZERO to do with budget deficits. Using private spending data to support your claims about government healthcare makes no sense. The two are not associated in an fashion except that they are healthcare spending. It would be like saying that housing sales are indicative of the failure of the government to properly allocate funds for homeless shelters. Not associated in any shape or fashion. Once again Azure, your grasp on the healthcare issue is non-existant, and this is yet another post that supports that.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

That's nice for him and all, but most of us know that "prophesy" business is, well, not true.

Someone with such radical beliefs shouldn't have any influence on the President.

Well even if the majority doesn't believe in biblical prophesy there is a healthy minority who does. Again you haven't shown where such belief would make Parsley a bad councilor.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Well even if the majority doesn't believe in biblical prophesy there is a healthy minority who does. Again you haven't shown where such belief would make Parsley a bad councilor.

It's pretty straightforward -- this guy spends his time preaching and believing what I consider to be nonsense, so he shouldn't have an influence on decisions that affect the country, let alone the world.

But if you want to be specific... the government should be thinking "long term" all the time (even though they don't). The decisions they make might be felt for generations. This Parsley guy writes books about how people living right now can get ready for the end of the world. He ain't thinking about future generations because he, apparently, doesn't think there will be future generations and I can only imagine he'd plan accordingly.

Why worry about the future when there isn't one?

So there's one reason why he shouldn't have any influence.

Another reason is that he believes (correct me if I'm wrong) there will be a war in the Middle East and then Jesus will come down from heaven and take him to paradise. One concern (of many) I have with this is that he just might think it's in his best interest to hasten what he thinks will be his ascension to heaven by stirring up more trouble over there.

So that's a decent reason from my standpoint. Maybe not yours though.

Bla bla bla. I don't think McCain actually believes any of this stuff anyway and is just currying favor with those who do. I still don't like the idea of people who think "Satan" exists and is out there pulling strings, or that I am a heathen destined to spend eternity in his clutches, having influence on anything other than their own mind.

[Phaneuf3]

I was a bit surprised to find out that Obama wrote that entire speech he made the other day himself. I'd want to get more than one source on this but - wow! Impressive speech and even more so now that they appear to be his own words.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3...770/569/465227

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Yeah, it would really suck to know that the President of the United States could actually think on his own. After 8 years of President ######, a guy that can conjugate a verb, and not just murder one, would be a welcome change. What I really liked about the speech was that he was introspective, analytical and challenged the rest of America to be the same. In a political system that hinges on dirty politics and mudslinging, this was a bold move that opens himself up to further attack. He focused on important issues and made an impassioned rhetorical plea for others to do the same. This was a speech to tell your grandchildren about and sets up a watershed moment in American politics. Obama has placed us at a crossroads and it is up to the electorate to decide which way public discourse and democracy will travel. Based on the reactions I've read from Joe Blow in the blogosphere, I'm not hopeful.

[HotHotHeat]

Most interesting political commentary to date last night.

CNN analyst said for the first time he felt as if a politician was speaking to him as an adult. He said too often politicians dumb down their language, and that it was very refreshing to hear something well articulated come from the mouth of a presidential candidate.

Imagine a President that not only thought for himself, but made the people think for themselves too. About what the people want America to be, instead of a President that sends veto after veto back to congress because it doesn't match his neo-con agenda. It's an amazing thought.

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Well even if the majority doesn't believe in biblical prophesy there is a healthy minority who does. Again you haven't shown where such belief would make Parsley a bad councilor.

Because he is no better than the extremists in the middle east that are preaching death to America and Israel. He is preaching that Christianity is the one and only true religion, and that Islam is a farce, and should be destroyed.

Hmm.. that sound really familiar don't you think? The only difference is it is coming from an American Evangelical extremist, instead of a Islamic Jihad extremist.

It's essentially the same message of hate, misunderstanding and intolerance.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Based on the reactions I've read from Joe Blow in the blogosphere, I'm not hopeful.

Well you should feel hopeful....because a recent study said that only 20% of Americans read blogs.

Actually....that might equal to 50% of the people who vote, so nevermind.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

CNN analyst said for the first time he felt as if a politician was speaking to him as an adult. He said too often politicians dumb down their language, and that it was very refreshing to hear something well articulated come from the mouth of a presidential candidate.

Jon Stewart said the same thing last night - try as they might, they could not poke fun at the speech, and Stewart admitted that we were spoken to as adults.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Azure, what is with your signature? It makes no sense.

It appears that you're trying to show that Obama somehow lied, but in the first comment he says that the he had not heard the statements (God damn America, being the issue discussed) while he was in church, which has proven to be true (Obama was not in church but in transit to Miami for a speech later that night). The second comment supports the fact that he had heard comments critical of American foreign policy in the past. The two statements are not contradictory when viewed in proper context. What point are you trying to get across? That you are contextually impaired?

[HotHotHeat]

*Waits for response*

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Azure, what is with your signature? It makes no sense.

It appears that you're trying to show that Obama somehow lied, but in the first comment he says that the he had not heard the statements (God damn America, being the issue discussed) while he was in church, which has proven to be true (Obama was not in church but in transit to Miami for a speech later that night). The second comment supports the fact that he had heard comments critical of American foreign policy in the past. The two statements are not contradictory when viewed in proper context. What point are you trying to get across? That you are contextually impaired?

Quiet, you. Stop trying to change Azure's opinion with your facts. We'll have none of those shenanigans here.

LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING!

Also, Saddam Hussein had WMDs and there was a direct link between Iraq and the Al Qaeda attacks on 9/11.

[Azure]

You know, its funny.

Read carefully.

The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation.

And 4 days later...

Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.

But I thought he never heard him make any of those comments while he was in church?

Not too mention financially supporting the church with thousands of dollars.

So maybe I'm a bit confused why Obama attended that church for 20 years....and even letting crazy Rev. Wright baptize his children....even though he clearly heard those comments.

And not only that....but I was expecting Obama to come out and be firm of how wrong it was to associate with Rev. Wright. But maybe I'm expecting too much.

You know....Oprah left that church years about because of the rhetoric. I wonder why Obama didn't take the same stand?

[Azure]

Oh and...

Appearing on cable news shows this past weekend, Obama claimed when he saw recent videos that have Wright making such comments as “God damn America,” he was “shocked.” Obama implied that the reverend had not used such derogatory language in any of the church services Obama attended over the past two decades.

Clarification: The Obama campaign has told members of the press that Senator Obama was not in church on the day cited, July 22, because he had a speech he gave in Miami at 1:30 PM. Our writer, Jim Davis, says he attended several services at Senator Obama's church during the month of July, including July 22. The church holds services three times every Sunday at 7:30 and 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. Central time. While both the early morning and evening service allowed Sen. Obama to attend the service and still give a speech in Miami, Mr. Davis stands by his story that during one of the services he attended during the month of July, Senator Obama was present and sat through the sermon given by Rev. Wright as described in the story. Mr. Davis said Secret Service were also present in the church during Senator Obama's attendance. Mr. Davis' story was first published on Newsmax on August 9, 2007. Shortly before publication, Mr. Davis contacted the press office of Sen. Obama several times for comment about the Senator's attendance and Rev. Wright's comments during his sermon. The Senator's office declined to comment.

The original article from August 2007.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...8/194812.shtml